The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1887-02-24
Occasional Notes.


Occasional Notes.
The other morning, when the rain was
drilling in the street and outdoor work
was at standstill, three workingnen
CHANGED to meet in the Varginian office
The weather was the topic of conversation
and each of the trio complained of its un-
pleasant effect upon his physical comfort.
A comparison of notes disclosed the fact
that each was suffering from the effects
OF an old war wound. Two of them had
gone down at Spottsylvania in 1S69-one
with frightful shell wound in his side,
that for nearly twenty-four years has been
a constant source Of pain and annoyance,
whilst the leg of the other had been pierced
just below the knee by minnie ball, that
shattered the bone, and left as a legacy
nearly quarter of century of suffering,
for the wound has not yet healed, nor is it
likely to. The third had left leg on the
bloody field of Charlottesville, and was
pegging through the world on a wooden
stump, whilst with every day came an
acute reminder Of war S terrible penalties.
Pretty soon three others joined the group,
and two out of the three bore battle scars.
The finger of one had been carried away by
a shot, whilst the other had deep cash
plowed through the top of his head by a
bullet. All five were Confederate soldiers,
and all five are now active, earnest, stanch
Republicans.
The practical injustice of the state rev.
enue laws has been forcibly brought to the
attention of the tax payers during the past
week or ten days. AS the returns to the
Commissioner are made, the inequality,
not to say imbecility of the law, is mani
fest. The income feature is especially
aggravating and is construed in dozen
different ways. A strict construction
makes the tax payer liable for taxation for
every cent he receives in excess of $500,
and the amount paid out for rent and hire
of labor. No matter what the actual ex
penses Of his family are, no matter if to
meet those expenses during the year he
has had to borrow money, and is really
possessed of'less than he had the year be-
fore, still he must pay taxes upon the cost
of his support in excess of the exemptions
noted. A more popular construction is
to return as income only the actual net re-
transactions. The difference between the
two constructions-to say nothing of nu-
merous others-opens wide the door for the
greatest inequality in the operation of the
law, and demonstrates the necessity of
common sense amendments that cannot be
misunderstood, and are susceptible of uni
form enforcement. AS it stands at pres.
ent, the statute bears merely upon those
who conscientiously adhere to the strict
construction, whilst it practically exempts
those who give to it a different interpre-
tation. Another feature of the law which
needs to be amended, is that which re-
quires return to be made Of all bank de-
posits, even if the money does not rightly
belong to the party in whose name it
stands. The effect of this clause is well
Illustrated by an actual example which &C.
CURED the other day. A gentleman had a
note in bank for 5000, borrowed money
In order to meet the debt at maturity, he
husbanded his resources, and had accumu-
lated deposit of $3.50. This sum was
dedicated to the payment of the note, and
yet it was taxed as the property of the de-
positor, ana the note itself was taxed in
the hands of the bank. Another gentle
man happened to have SS75 in the bank on
the LIST of February, which he had placed
there for the purpose of checking on to
debtors. The money really didnot belong
to him, although under his control, but he
was compelled to return it for taxation,
thus practically being forced to pay
taxes on his debts as we'll as assets.